That Maxxis "babes calendar" article…

this is bollocks to be frank. I’m annoyed at the level of censorship it implies. Who are you, Mary Whitehouse?

Please explain how this is censorship. Go on, I’d really love to hear you try and make that case.

Saying you’re ‘annoyed’ by her article – how is that different from the article saying she’s annoyed by Maxxis’ tacky calendar? I don’t remember hearing anyone calling for it to be banned, just pointing out that it’s pretty lame and unhelpful.

I really can’t see how anyone can get this upset about this.

YOu may disagree but really you canot see why folk get “uspet” by pictures of scantily cald women used to sell products?
Really. I find this very hard to believe Not least because ts rather simple and ben explained numerous times on this thread alone

I have no idea who Lisa is and i have no idea why, when you cannot understand what the fuss is about , you are now capable of giving me similar things i should be upset about.

why chuck your toys out of the pram about Maxxis and noone else?

Well when you word the !question so objectively I really feel the need to engage. Its a thread about Maxxis if it helps I assume all people feel the same about other companies who do the same thing. WHy would this suprose you, I imagine you dont GAS a sht when other companies do the saem. Its not exactly professor levels of deductive logic here is it.

Your second point is such a risible and childish straw man its not worth responding beyond saying yes if it was different it would be different.

What if all of the perfectly respectable ladies in the offending calendar were wearing nice evening dresses? How about cardigans? What if they were all over the age of 40? Would that be empowering?

You mean a bit like this[/url]

As you stated in your previous post that ‘they’re all at’ but Maxxis is being victimised (boo hoo), but declined to provide any examples of anyone else ‘at it’, when repeatedly asked, so I had a look for you.

Seriously… its fine to just say you just like looking at tits. Just do us the courtesy of not trying to portray it as some matter of principle that should be defended at all costs

I can’t speak for anyone else, but i find it hard to pretend to be offended by things that don’t offend me. I’m not offended by clothed or nakid ladies. I’m not offended by clothed or naked men either. Not offended by dead cats (i don’t like cats btw) or dead dogs (i love dogs bt other w). In fact there’s not much that i do find offensive. If that makes me a 70’s sexist, racist deadcatanddogist then so be it. I’m not offended that anyone would think that.

YOu may disagree but really you canot see why folk get “uspet” by pictures of scantily cald women used to sell products?
Really. I find this very hard to believe Not least because ts rather simple and ben explained numerous times on this thread alone

I have no idea who Lisa is and i have no idea why, when you cannot understand what the fuss is about , you are now capable of giving me similar things i should be upset about.

You must send your whole life upset.

Do the perfume adverts on the TV upset and offend you? They tend to have scantily clad, attractive men and women, in suggestive settings and poses.

What about dancers in a chorus line? Where does the art finish and the objectification of women begin?

The point I was trying to make about Lisa Snowden, who the blogger is an obvious fan and who she has met, has presented herself as a sex object numerous times but that doesn’t bother her. However Maxxis does.

Clooney and co. objectified[/url]

Seven pages of posts says her views don’t leave us indifferent. So there are a few ambiguities from a fashion model turned Maxxis hater, but I think there’s also a fair bit of tongue in cheek and without being a little OTT who would take any notice? My great aunt chained herself to some railings in London in the days before the Net allowed people to express views without being moved on or arrested.

Some people just don’t get it.

It is possible to recognise that something is a piece of sad, dated, sexist silliness, and that it might offend women, and perpetuate unfortunate attitudes and steroptypes, without being offended yourself…

Lots of contentious and bad-taste things don’t offend me, but I am not so selfish and self-absorbed as to think that makes them reasonable or sensible or polite.

You must send your whole life upset.

Hurling out a really lazy and unimaginative insult clearly covered up your false claim.

Are you going to be able to engage with out insulting folk whilst , oh the irony, claiming they are the “Upset “ones?

The point I was trying to make about Lisa Snowden, who the blogger is an obvious fan and who she has met, has presented herself as a sex object numerous times but that doesn’t bother her. However Maxxis does.

If I bother to explain this to you, not like this is hard, will you insult me again or actually try and comprehend?

grum – Member

this is bollocks to be frank. I’m annoyed at the level of censorship it implies. Who are you, Mary Whitehouse?

Please explain how this is censorship. Go on, I’d really love to hear you try and make that case.

Saying you’re ‘annoyed’ by her article – how is that different from the article saying she’s annoyed by Maxxis’ tacky calendar? I don’t remember hearing anyone calling for it to be banned, just pointing out that it’s pretty lame and unhelpful.

OK, seeing as you completely misread what I’m saying I’ll try again.

The censorship is ‘implied’ – i.e. its not explicitly banned but you dont want to see it therefore it shouldn’t be produced therefore it is censorship. Not the article, your comment grum.

You put words in my mouth saying I was offended by Adele’s opinion. I’m, not offended by it. I’m annoyed at the level to which the attitude expressed here would censor a very tame aspect of life.

Its deliberately taking offence to something, whilst not exactly the most classy thing in the world, does no harm and sits in its own rather tacky niche. Why get so bothered by it?

If I bother to explain this to you, not like this is hard, will you insult me again or actually try and comprehend?

Please explain how “glamour” models on a tyre calendar make her angry but a “glamour” model exposing herself in Maxim/FHM etc. doesn’t?

You must send your whole life upset.

How is that an insult? If you are upset at the portrayal of women as sex objects to sell stuff, you must be. It is everywhere.

I have no idea who Lisa is and i have no idea why, when you cannot understand what the fuss is about , you are now capable of giving me similar things i should be upset about.

Can you explain that sentence as well please?

The censorship is ‘implied’ …..

Its deliberately taking offence

Its neither of these things these are just your claims

Deliberately take offence is such a tiresome and meaningless meme/trope.

I may as well say you are deliberately disagreeing rather than just accept you actually mean what you say ..its very dismissive as a phrase as well as inaccurate. Superbly passive aggressive though.

Of course abyone who disagrees with you is a prude like Mary Whitehose

TBH o thought only teenage boys got excited by this and now I have to debate it with folk who debate like teenage boys

Its very helpful and aids the debate when someone is this dismissive of your views innit ?

binners – Member

What if all of the perfectly respectable ladies in the offending calendar were wearing nice evening dresses? How about cardigans? What if they were all over the age of 40? Would that be empowering?

You mean a bit like this

As you stated in your previous post that ‘they’re all at’ but Maxxis is being victimised (boo hoo), but declined to provide any examples of anyone else ‘at it’, when repeatedly asked, so I had a look for you.

Seriously… its fine to just say you just like looking at tits. Just do us the courtesy of not trying to portray it as some matter of principle that should be defended at all costs

Actually binners, I did provide examples and I wasn’t asked repeatedly but you carry on making stuff up if you like.

I’d be lying if I said I didn’t like tits. I don’t think many men and some women would find that especially shocking or unusual. If its such a bad thing to occasionally observe womens breasts perhaps we should impose a dress code?

oh, this is classic from junkyard:

If I bother to explain this to you, not like this is hard, will you insult me again or actually try and comprehend?

Some people really do love to take offence eh.

Please explain how “glamour” models on a tyre calendar make her angry but a “glamour” model exposing herself in Maxim/FHM etc. doesn’t?

you need to ask her what she thinks- why are you asking me what she thinks?

How is that an insult? If you are upset at the portrayal of women as sex objects to sell stuff, you must be. It is everywhere.

where have i said i was upset ?anyway I notice once more you fail to addres the fact you could not get it when you really could anyway lets get sidetracked why dont we.

Can you explain that sentence as well please?

Yes i can ,though its self evident. Ids there a young child nearby to help you?

Anyway my dad is bigger than yours and we can meet at the bike sheds after school to sort this out

Deliberately take offence is such a tiresome and meaningless meme/trope.

… Superbly passive aggressive though.

You couldn’t make it up!

Some people really do love to take offence eh.

A rather amusing , if somewhat childish, reply,

I find this far more offensive and likely to put women off cycling, than a calendar that isn’t even aimed at cyclists and most will never see.I’m not offended by it but it might make one or two of our partners question the advisability of letting us men go on mixed gender rides.[/quote]I’ve been out riding and pondering this and I’ve decided that I actually am quite offended after all. This isn’t too far away from “all men are rapists” and is the sort of gender generalisation we’d otherwise flag up as inappropriate.

Still, it gets her noticed and ups the click count for anyone publishing her stuff.

Anyway my dad is bigger than yours and we can meet at the bike sheds after school to sort this out

TKD or MMA?

I have no idea who Lisa is and i have no idea why, when you cannot understand what the fuss is about , you are now capable of giving me similar things i should be upset about.

That is not self evident. It’s gibberish.

I’ve been enjoying the various debates so far where no-one takes a blind bit of notice of what the other is saying but its starting to get a little bit ‘did Aldo take a dive’ now. Can’t we just leave it and close the thread, its not going anywhere and I’m strangely drawn back to it time and again and I’ve got stuff to do.

Junkyard – lazarus

Some people really do love to take offence eh.

A rather amusing , if somewhat childish, reply,

Actually junkyard, that is the whole point. The only way to be offended by this entire thing is to develop a very contrived narrative of what the whole thing represents. You wouldn’t even know about it unless it was pointed out to you, the fact that maxxis babes exists and has existed for a long time by the looks of it shows how ‘niche’ it is.

Why get upset by it?

The censorship is ‘implied’ – i.e. its not explicitly banned but you dont want to see it therefore it shouldn’t be produced therefore it is censorship. Not the article, your comment grum.

What a load of utter nonsense. You’re making some enormous leaps there. Saying ‘I don’t like it’ is nothing like censorship. I could equally well argue you are calling for the article to be censored because you don’t like it. It would be bollocks, but it’s exactly the same.

wilko1999 – I quite agree. Fascinated by the mentality though!

Grum.

I’m not saying to Adele not to write her article, I’m saying I don’t agree with her.

Adele is asking, no demanding, that Maxxis self censor despite the fact that most of their competitors in the motorsport industry don’t and won’t get any grief over this type of thing.

So yeah, its censorship.

Still, it gets her noticed and ups the click count for anyone publishing her stuff.

Massively this.
If anyone doesn’t think that clickbaitery was the whole purpose of the exercise, they’re being monumentally naive

…does no harm…

I look at my daughter, think about the world she’s going to grow up in and the challenges she’ll face, and I think sexist advertising (and some of the attitudes expressed here) are harmful.

On a positive note, as I said previously, I think there will be less and less of this sort of stuff around as she grows up. I think most of us are moving on and enjoying a society that’s a bit more inclusive and friendly.

Bourbon anyone?

On a positive note, as I said previously, I think there will be less and less of this sort of stuff around as she grows up. I think most of us are moving on and enjoying a society that’s a bit more inclusive and friendly.

Dream on, A vaguely sexual calendar produced by a tyre retailer I am sure wil have little or no effect on her growing up.
I would be more worried about the skewed attitude to sex all her would be suiters who will be dying to get there hands on her had after years of exposure to hardcore Internet porn while locked away in there bedrooms.

Also there are naked selfies and revenge porn to worry about.

Is it just men lining up to tell the author what she shouldn’t take offence at, and why sexism should be allowed in marketing as long as it’s to do with motorsports, and how she’s just promoting herself by having an opinion and writing about it and getting it published? Or are any of you holding these positions actually female? Seems to me to be just a long line of men trying to keep a woman in “her place” and keep the world ticking along just as they like it. Well wake up and smell the coffee, marketing needs to appeal to women as well as men, and companies/brands need to listen to those women (and men) who don’t want to be associated with this kind of outdated crap. They need to know it might lose them market share. Articles like this need to be written so that things can change… otherwise marketing bods responsible for this kind of stuff will think that there is no commercial downside to their current approach. If people don’t speak up, the approach won’t change…. and as a big fan of Maxxis tyres… I hope that next year they take the lead in all their markets, rather than following others in those markets down such a boring cliche male centric route. I have to admit though, that while their tyres are the best, I’ll keep buying them… I don’t buy tyres based on the image and marketing of the brand, just on how well they work. That doesn’t stop me from joining in calls for them to move their marketing forward, and up out of the gutter. They can do better.

Full disclosure: I don’t possess a vagina.
I do think the article was written to be emotive clickbait.
I make no claims to the right or wrongness of the authors position, nor any other posters on this thread.
In the interests of a balanced view I did however show the thread to my partner last night. Her thoughts? “Oh for ****’s sake.”
HINT – it wasn’t directed at the calendar.

TKD or MMA?

😆

A vaguely sexual calendar produced by a tyre retailer I am sure wil have little or no effect on her growing up.

Just because you don’t know there’s a problem, doesn’t mean there isn’t one.

It’s not just this calendar, it’s the mountain of other calendars, the attitudes that created them, and the message they carried, over the last 50-60 years

great publicity for maxxis

Serious question: Do the Maxxis Babes ever attend any MTB events? Or do any other tyre companies send their promo teams to events?

, the attitudes that created them, and the message they carried, over the last 50-60 years

not got a clue what you mean unless the message is telling the owner the date?

Gobuchul, there were Red Bull girls at the 2002 Ft William SDA if that helps. They were handing out cans of the stuff at the top…… thought I was going to spew halfway down my first run, had to say “no” to the nectar distributing lovely for my second run

Still, it gets her noticed and ups the click count for anyone publishing her stuff.

Had this in mind as I’ve dipped into and out of this thread. Columnist says something contentious, gains wider publicity, generates more visitors to host of column. Job done.

In general terms, I don’t really ever remember thinking that my view of a product’s appeal has been enhanced because a nice looking girl was put beside it. I’ve always seen the product and the girl as separate things to appreciate in their own right.

Changing attitudes is important but what type of attitude do we change them to.

Would fair and equal objectification be better than censorship?

not got a clue what you mean unless the message is telling the owner the date?

Yeah that’s the problem, a lot of men don’t.

Not got time to compose a proper reply unfortunately, will try later.

Yeah that’s the problem, a lot of women don’t.

Fixed by the power de la j’peg